It's been a year since a Northwest D.C. housewife carried a Ruger .357 Magnum into police headquarters in a blue plastic grocery bag and became the District's first legal handgun owner since the Supreme Court overturned a decades-old ban.Two such erroneous predictions were by the WaPo's Eugene Robinson (understated), and an anonymous commenter on my post-Heller post:
Today, Amy McVey's handgun is one of just 515 that have been legally registered with the Metropolitan Police Department -- a number that pales compared with more than 2,000 illegal weapons that have been seized in the same period.
She hasn't had to use it to defend her home. Nor has anyone attempted to steal it and use it against her or to commit some other crime -- undermining the most widely used arguments for and against permitting guns.
In fact, police say they have no information that would indicate any gun legally registered since July 17, 2008, has been fired by its owner in defense of life or property, or that one has been stolen or used in the commission of a crime. . .
During the year residents have been allowed to register guns, preliminary police statistics say violent crime and property crime have gone down citywide -- a modest decline that even the most ardent gun rights advocate would have difficulty attributing to legal gun ownership. Police also say they have seized more than 2,000 illegal guns from D.C. streets in the last year.
Wayne LaPierre, executive vice president of the National Rifle Association, said the fears of gun-control advocates -- that having more guns would lead to increased gun violence -- were unfounded.
"All the handgun bill people's predictions have proved to be wrong," Mr. LaPierre said.
I wonder how you will feel when you read the new statistics on "accidental" gun deaths and suicides. Do you think there might be some changes in those numbers in the future after this assinine Supreme Court decision is implemented?Answer: just fine.
(via Sundries Shack)